On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 04:50:33AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:57:35AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> Under Linux, can't all of this be done with mount --move anyway? I'm not > >> convinced that we actually need a /run any more.
> > So you would have these files stored in /var/run from the beginning, and use > > mount --move to shuffle them around if /var is a separate mount point? I'm > > pretty sure --move is a 2.6-only feature, too, and we haven't yet gotten rid > > of 2.4 for etch; and is there an equivalent solution for non-Linux ports? > Yeah, it's 2.6 only. Are we seriously expecting to ship etch with 2.4 > kernels? Is anyone still doing active security support for it? I'm eager to be able to drop 2.4 for etch, but I don't think it's completely clear yet whether the hardware support in 2.6 will be broad enough to meet users' needs. I expect we'll need to work with porters over the next months to begin pruning architectures from the 2.4 tree, and evaluate what's left at the end. Yes, lack of active security support for 2.4 is a concern. Also, bear in mind that even if 2.4 isn't shipped with etch, we still have to provide an upgrade path for users of sarge, so some thought would need to go into what that would look like. > The linux-onlyness of it is a bit more awkward, but non-Linux OSs tend > to be lacking things like decent ram filesystems anyway, so the > semantics are going to vary in any case. But I guess if it's difficult, > sticking with /run might be easier. Has anyone talked to the FHS guys > about this? (I haven't actually checked whether it's in there, so the > answer may well be "yes" :) ) I'm not sure if anyone has talked to the FHS folks lately about this, no. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
